DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
REQUIREMENT FOR UNITY OF INVENTION
As provided in 37 CFR 1.475(a), a national stage application shall relate to one invention only or to a group of inventions so linked as to form a single general inventive concept (“requirement of unity of invention”). Where a group of inventions is claimed in a national stage application, the requirement of unity of invention shall be fulfilled only when there is a technical relationship among those inventions involving one or more of the same or corresponding special technical features. The expression “special technical features” shall mean those technical features that define a contribution which each of the claimed inventions, considered as a whole, makes over the prior art.
The determination whether a group of inventions is so linked as to form a single general inventive concept shall be made without regard to whether the inventions are claimed in separate claims or as alternatives within a single claim. See 37 CFR 1.475(e).
When Claims Are Directed to Multiple Categories of Inventions:
As provided in 37 CFR 1.475 (b), a national stage application containing claims to different categories of invention will be considered to have unity of invention if the claims are drawn only to one of the following combinations of categories:
(1) A product and a process specially adapted for the manufacture of said product; or
(2) A product and a process of use of said product; or
(3) A product, a process specially adapted for the manufacture of the said product, and a use of the said product; or
(4) A process and an apparatus or means specifically designed for carrying out the said process; or
(5) A product, a process specially adapted for the manufacture of the said product, and an apparatus or means specifically designed for carrying out the said process.
Otherwise, unity of invention might not be present. See 37 CFR 1.475 (c).
Restriction is required under 35 U.S.C. 121 and 372.
This application contains the following inventions or groups of inventions which are not so linked as to form a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1.
In accordance with 37 CFR 1.499, applicant is required, in reply to this action, to elect a single invention to which the claims must be restricted.
Group 1, claim(s) 1-24, drawn to an apparatus and method of preparing an aerated liquid.
Group 2, claim(s) 25-41, drawn to a flavor capsule.
The groups of inventions listed above do not relate to a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1 because, under PCT Rule 13.2, they lack the same or corresponding special technical features for the following reasons:
Group 1 and Group 2 lack unity of invention because the groups do not share the same or corresponding technical feature.
During a telephone conversation with Greg Baker on 8/29/2025 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Group 1, claims 1-24. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 25-41 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
The examiner has required restriction between product or apparatus claims and process claims. Where applicant elects claims directed to the product/apparatus, and all product/apparatus claims are subsequently found allowable, withdrawn process claims that include all the limitations of the allowable product/apparatus claims should be considered for rejoinder. All claims directed to a nonelected process invention must include all the limitations of an allowable product/apparatus claim for that process invention to be rejoined.
In the event of rejoinder, the requirement for restriction between the product/apparatus claims and the rejoined process claims will be withdrawn, and the rejoined process claims will be fully examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. Thus, to be allowable, the rejoined claims must meet all criteria for patentability including the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 101, 102, 103 and 112. Until all claims to the elected product/apparatus are found allowable, an otherwise proper restriction requirement between product/apparatus claims and process claims may be maintained. Withdrawn process claims that are not commensurate in scope with an allowable product/apparatus claim will not be rejoined. See MPEP § 821.04. Additionally, in order for rejoinder to occur, applicant is advised that the process claims should be amended during prosecution to require the limitations of the product/apparatus claims. Failure to do so may result in no rejoinder. Further, note that the prohibition against double patenting rejections of 35 U.S.C. 121 does not apply where the restriction requirement is withdrawn by the examiner before the patent issues. See MPEP § 804.01.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. GB1911710.0, filed on 8/15/2019.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/11/2024,6/3/2024,1/23/2024,11/6/2023 and 2/7/2023 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract is objected to for being two paragraphs and referring to Figure 1.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The term “flavour” and “flavouring” needs to be changed to flavor or flavoring. The claims have been amended to using flavor or flavoring and the specification needs to match.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Gas supply mechanism and liquid flow controller in claim 1.
Flavor dispenser mechanism in claim 8.
Capsule opening mechanism in claim 15 and 24.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The specification defines the gas supply mechanism comprises a valve (paragraph 0123, line 1). The specification defines the liquid flow controller comprises a valve (paragraph 0008, line 1). The specification defines the flavor dispenser mechanism is defined as a piston (paragraph 0023, line 1). The specification defines the capsule opening mechanism is defined as a piston (paragraph 0023, line 1).
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4,18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Leung et al (US 8,888,073).
With regards to claim 1, Leung et al discloses an apparatus for the preparation of aerated drinks (carbonated beverage appliance, Title), comprising an aerator stage comprising a removable aerator bottle defining a chamber for receiving a liquid to be aerated (bottle 20, Fig. 1); an aerator bottle interface operative to engage the removable aerator bottle and seal the chamber thereof (carbonating head assembly 18, Fig. 4-7 and 11-16), a gas inlet line operative to fluidly connect a gas source to the aerator bottle interface (compressed gas from gas cylinder 40 is then injected into the liquid within the bottle 20 through the carbonating tube 30 to produce a carbonated beverage, col 4, lines 39-41); and a gas supply mechanism for controlling supply of gas from the gas source to the aerator bottle interface via the gas inlet line (cylinder attachment head 36 for controlling supply of gas from gas cylinder 40 to carbonating head 18 via plunger 42 and bore 34 to the nozzle 32 of carbonating head 18, Fig. 11); an aerated liquid dispenser outlet (dispensing nozzle 66, Fig. 1); a liquid outlet line operative to fluidly connect the aerator bottle interface to the aerated liquid dispenser outlet to allow aerated liquid to flow from the chamber of the removable aerator bottle to the aerated liquid dispenser outlet (fluid flow pathway 62 operative to fluidly connect the carbonating head assembly 18 to the dispensing nozzle 66 to allowed carbonated liquid to flow from bottle 20 to dispensing nozzle 66, col 5, lines 7-14); and a liquid flow controller for controlling discharge of aerated liquid from the removable aerator bottle to the aerated liquid dispenser outlet via the liquid outlet line (a valve assembly 68 is positioned within the fluid flow pathway 62 to control the flow of liquid therethrough, col 4, lines 64-65).
With regards to claim 2, Leung et al discloses wherein the apparatus is configured to transfer aerated liquid from the removable aerator bottle to the aerated liquid dispenser outlet using gas pressure in the sealed chamber (depression of the button 74 on the top of the appliance 10 causes the valve 68 to open, and the pressure from the gas cylinder 40 pushes the carbonated liquid from bottle 20 up through the tube 60 and out of the dispensing nozzle 66, col 5, lines 39-43).
With regards to claim 3, Leung et al discloses wherein the liquid flow controller comprises a valve and a flow regulator operative to maintain a substantially constant flow rate of aerated liquid from the liquid dispenser outlet as aerated liquid is discharged from the removable aerator bottle to the aerated liquid dispenser outlet (valve assembly 68 comprises a plunger 70 that opens and closes and a spring 72 that regulates flow through the valve assembly 68, Fig. 12).
With regards to claim 4, Leung et al discloses wherein the liquid outlet line comprises a dip tube having an opening for receiving aerated liquid positioned at a lower part of the chamber when the removable aerator bottle is engaged by the aerator bottle interface (depression of the button 74 on the top of the appliance 10 causes the valve 68 to open, and the pressure from the gas cylinder 40 pushes the carbonated liquid up through the tube 60 positioned at a lower part of bottle 20 and out of the dispensing nozzle 66,col 5, lines 39-42).
With regards to claim 18, Leung et al discloses a method of preparing an aerated liquid using an aerator device (a method of using a carbonated beverage appliance 10), the method comprising filling a chamber of a removable aerator bottle with liquid (filling bottle 20, Fig. 1); attaching the removable aerator bottle to an aerator bottle interface of the aerator device and sealing the chamber (attaching bottle 20 to carbonating head assembly 18, Fig. 5); aerating the liquid in the chamber of the removable aerator bottle by transferring pressurized gas to the chamber; and subsequently transferring aerated liquid from the chamber of the removable aerator bottle to a receptacle via an aerated liquid dispenser outlet connected to the aerator bottle interface by a liquid outlet line (the button 74 is in operative communication with the plunger 42 of the gas cylinder attachment head 36 such that when the button 74 is depressed, pressurized gas flows from the gas cylinder 40 into the bottle 20 to maintain carbonation of the liquid therein and also to generate enough pressure within the bottle 20 to force the carbonated liquid from the bottle, up through the detachable tube 60 and out of the dispensing arm 64, col 5, lines 15-23).
With regards to claim 19, Leung et al discloses wherein the step of transferring aerated liquid from the chamber of the removable aerator bottle to the receptacle is achieved substantially using gas pressure developed in a head of the chamber during the aeration step to discharge aerated liquid from the chamber of the removable aerator bottle (the button 74 is in operative communication with the plunger 42 of the gas cylinder attachment head 36 such that when the button 74 is depressed, pressurized gas flows from the gas cylinder 40 into the bottle 20 to maintain carbonation of the liquid therein and also to generate enough pressure within the bottle 20 to force the carbonated liquid from the bottle, up through the detachable tube 60 and out of the dispensing arm 64, col 5, lines 15-23).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 5-16 and 20-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leung et al as applied to claims 1 and 18 above, and further in view of Mazza (US 3,628,444).
With regards to claim 5, Leung et al does not discloses wherein the apparatus further comprises a flavoring liquid dispenser comprising a flavoring liquid dispenser outlet.
Mazza teaches an apparatus for production of aerated beverages wherein the apparatus further comprises a flavoring liquid dispenser comprising a flavoring liquid dispenser outlet (a punching tool 7 and supporting member 1 having a cartridge 4 containing a liquid-flavoring substance 5 which allows flavored liquid out of an extension 6, Fig. 1 and 3).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Leung et al and Mazza before him or her, to modify the aerator stage and dispensing arm of Leung et al to include the punching tool and flavoring liquid dispenser as taught by Mazza because the combination allows various flavors for a user using a beverage appliance.
With regards to claim 6, Mazza teaches wherein the flavouring liquid dispenser outlet is positioned adjacent the aerated liquid dispenser outlet (cartridge 4 is adjacent to duct 18 connected vessel 16 of carbonated water drawn from suitable reservoir, Fig. 1).
With regards to claim 7, Mazza teaches wherein the flavoring liquid dispenser outlet and aerated liquid dispenser outlet are configured to perform in-air mixing outside of the apparatus (pressured gas is supplied to central bore 11 through cartridge 4 to mix air and liquid in collecting vessel 16, Fig. 1).
With regards to claim 8, Mazza teaches wherein the flavoring liquid dispenser comprises a flavor dispenser mechanism that is activated by gas pressure from the aerator stage (a pressurized gas (such CO.sub.2, compressed air) or with water at the pressure of the main, to establish a communication between the bore 11 and the atmosphere directly to cartridge 4, col 2, lines 44-46).
With regards to claim 9, Mazza teaches wherein flavor dispenser mechanism is activated by gas pressure from the removable aerator bottle (a pressurized gas (such CO.sub.2, compressed air) or with water at the pressure of the main, to establish a communication between the bore 11 and the atmosphere directly to cartridge 4, col 2, lines 44-46).
With regards to claim 10, Mazza teaches wherein the apparatus further comprises a gas outlet line for supplying gas from the aerator to the flavoring liquid dispenser (a pressurized gas (such CO.sub.2, compressed air) or with water at the pressure of the main, to establish a communication between the bore 11 and the atmosphere directly to cartridge 4, col 2, lines 44-46).
With regards to claim 11, Mazza teaches wherein the gas outlet line is operative to supply gas from the removable aerator bottle to the liquid dispenser includes a gas outlet provide in the arerator bottle interface (a pressurized gas (such CO.sub.2, compressed air) or with water at the pressure of the main from duct 12, to establish a communication between the bore 11 and the atmosphere directly to cartridge 4, col 2, lines 44-46).
With regards to claim 12, Mazza teaches wherein the apparatus further comprises a gas outlet valve for controlling discharge of gas from the aerator stage to the flavor dispenser mechanism via the gas outlet line (duct 12 with valve 15 supplies a pressurized gas (such CO.sub.2, compressed air) or with water at the pressure of the main, to establish a communication between the bore 11 and the atmosphere directly to cartridge 4, col 2, lines 44-46).
With regards to claim 13, Mazza teaches wherein the flavoring liquid dispenser is configured to dispense flavoring liquid from a flavor capsule received in the flavoring liquid dispenser (member 1 is configured to dispense liquid-flavoring substance 5 from a cartridge 4 received in the member 1, Fig. 1).
With regards to claim 14, Mazza teaches wherein the flavor dispenser mechanism is operative to perform one or more of the following functions: open a flavor capsule received in the flavoring liquid dispenser (cartridge 4 is opened and punch by punching tool 7 to allow gas to push substance 5 through extension 6, Fig. 1); drive the flavoring liquid out from the opened flavor capsule towards flavoring dispenser outlet (cartridge 4 is opened and punch by punching tool 7 to allow gas to push substance 5 through extension 6, Fig. 1).
With regards to claim 15, Mazza teaches wherein the flavor dispenser mechanism comprises a capsule opening mechanism operative to apply a dispensing force to a flavor capsule received in the flavoring liquid dispenser (punching tool 7 operative to apply a central bore 11 to open cartridge 4 and pressurized gas to force substance 5 out, Fig. 1, col 2, lines 44-50).
With regards to claim 16, Mazza teaches where the capsule opening mechanism is driven by gas pressure from the aerator stage (punching tool 7 driven with a pressurized gas (such CO.sub.2, compressed air) or with water at the pressure of the main, to establish a communication between the bore 11 and the atmosphere directly, or to provide the central bore with a feeding stream composed of a combination of the above-mentioned feeds, col 2, lines 44-49).
With regards to claim 20, Leung et al does not discloses wherein the method further comprises dispensing a flavoring liquid from a flavoring liquid dispenser into the receptacle.
Mazza teaches a method of using an apparatus for production of aerated beverages wherein the method further comprises dispensing a flavoring liquid from a flavoring liquid dispenser into the receptacle (supporting member 1 having a cartridge 4 containing a liquid-flavoring substance 5 which allows flavored liquid out of an extension 6 into collecting vessel 16, Fig. 1 and 3).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Leung et al and Mazza before him or her, to modify the step of dispensing liquid of Leung et al to include the flavoring liquid dispenser as taught by Mazza because the combination allows various flavors for a user using a beverage appliance.
With regards to claim 21, Mazza teaches wherein the flavoring liquid dispenser has a flavoring liquid dispenser outlet positioned adjacent the aerated liquid dispenser outlet (cartridge 4 is adjacent to duct 18 connected vessel 16 of carbonated water drawn from suitable reservoir, Fig. 1).
With regards to claim 22, Mazza teaches wherein the method further comprises substantially simultaneously dispensing flavoring liquid and aerated liquid into the receptacle to achieve in-air mixing of the flavoring liquid and aerated liquid (pressured gas is supplied to central bore 11 through cartridge 4 to mix air and liquid in collecting vessel 16, Fig. 1).
With regards to claim 23, Mazza teaches wherein the step dispensing a flavoring liquid from the flavoring liquid dispenser comprises supplying pressurized gas from the aerator device to the flavoring liquid dispenser (pressured gas is supplied to central bore 11 through cartridge 4 to mix air and liquid in collecting vessel 16, Fig. 1).
With regards to claim 24, Mazza teaches wherein the step of dispensing a flavoring liquid from the flavoring liquid dispenser comprises inserting a flavor capsule into the flavoring liquid dispenser and the pressurized gas supplied to the flavoring liquid dispenser drives a capsule opening mechanism to apply a dispensing force to the flavor capsule received in the flavoring liquid dispenser (inserting cartridge 4 into member 1 and pressured gas is supplied to central bore 11 to punch cartridge 4 open to force substance 5 out of extension 6, Fig. 1).
Claim(s) 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leung et al and Mazza as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Lo Faro et al (US 10,485,374).
With regards to claim 17, Leung et al and Mazza teaches an electronic controller operative to control operation of the gas supply mechanism (control circuit can be used for automatic operation of magnetic valve 15,51 and 52 to control gas going to cartridge 4, Fig. 2 and 3).
Lueng et al and Mazza does not teach the flavor capsule comprises a machine-readable identifier; wherein the apparatus is operative to read the machine-readable identifier and electronic controller is operative to select a degree of aeration required based on the machine-readable identifier.
Lo Faro et al teaches the flavor capsule comprises a machine-readable identifier (an optical reader 80 in the portion 129 scans information from the capsule and sends it to the CPU, col 11, lines 10-12); wherein the apparatus is operative to read the machine-readable identifier and electronic controller is operative to select a degree of aeration required based on the machine-readable identifier (the device reads a code on the capsule and determines proportion size per container according to step 310 and in step 315, the device prompts the user to press down on the handle or otherwise initiate capsule seal breakage and in step 320, the dispenser requests that the user activate the hot or cold water beverage election and it is also possible that the beverage mixing process could be initiated by the pressing down on the cover to break the capsule and various automation features could be included to facilitate the initiation of the mixing process and automate the variety of the mixing process, col 13, lines 38-45).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Leung et al, Mazza, Lo Fara et al before him or her, to modify flavor capsule Leung et al and Mazza to include the optical scanner and information on the capsule as taught by Lo Fara et al because the combination allows for automatic beverage making.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS JOHN WARD whose telephone number is (571)270-1786. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7am - 4pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, STEVEN CRABB can be reached at 5712705095. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/THOMAS J WARD/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/EDWARD F LANDRUM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761